Within the past generation, historic preservation has evolved from a
limited and somewhat insular pursuit into a broad based popular movement
with wide support. The reasons for this support are varied. Some desire
a tangible sense of permanence and community, while others wish to know
about and embrace America's heritage in a direct and personally meaningful
way.

Recognition that historic preservation often is associated with economic
successes is an important reason, as is the fact that many see the preservation
of historic districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects as enhancing
their quality of life, adding variety and texture to the cultural landscape
in which they live and work. Largely because of such highly personal responses,
public support for historic preservation has flowed from the bottom up,
making it in the truest sense a grassroots movement, not just another
Government program.

With passage of the National Historic Preservation
Act in 1966 (NHPA), Congress made the Federal Government a full partner
and a leader in historic preservation. While Congress recognized that
national goals for historic preservation could best be achieved by supporting
the drive, enthusiasm, and wishes of local citizens and communities, it
understood that the Federal Government must set an example through enlightened
policies and practices. In the words of the Act, the Federal Government's
role would be to "provide leadership" for preservation, "contribute to"
and "give maximum encouragement" to preservation, and "foster conditions
under which our modern society and our prehistoric and historic resources
can exist in productive harmony."

Indeed, an underlying motivation in passage of the Act was to transform
the Federal Government from an agent of indifference, frequently responsible
for needless loss of historic resources, to a facilitator, an agent of
thoughtful change, and a responsible steward for future generations.

Complementary Roles of Public Agencies

To achieve this transformation, NHPA and related legislation sought
a partnership among the Federal Government and the States that would capitalize
on the strengths of each.

The Federal Government, led by the National
Park Service (NPS) as the agency with the longest and most direct
experience in studying, managing, and using historic resources, would
provide funding assistance, basic technical knowledge and tools, and
a broad national perspective on America's heritage.

The States, through State Historic Preservation
Officers (SHPOs) appointed by the Governor of each State, would
provide matching funds, a designated State office, and a statewide preservation
program tailored to State and local needs and designed to support and
promote State and local historic preservation interests and priorities.

The drafters of NHPA, however, also appreciated that transforming the
role of the Federal Government would require more. A new ethic was needed
throughout all levels and agencies of the Federal Government; two tenets
of the Act were critical to this transformation.

An Advisory Council on Historic Preservation,
the first and only Federal entity created solely to address historic
preservation issues, was established as a cabinet-level body of Presidentially
appointed citizens, experts in the field, and Federal, State, and local
government representatives, to ensure that private citizens, local communities,
and other concerned parties would have a forum for influencing Federal
policy, programs, and decisions as they impacted historic properties
and their attendant values.

Section 106 of NHPA granted legal status
to historic preservation in Federal planning, decisionmaking, and project
execution. Section 106 requires all Federal agencies to take into account
the effects of their actions on historic properties, and provide ACHP
with a reasonable opportunity to comment on those actions and the manner
in which Federal agencies are taking historic properties into account
in their decisions.

As with any successful partnership, collaboration and division of labor
have remained essential ingredients. Over the years through its various
changes to NHPA, Congress has reaffirmed this partnership. The role of
each partner has evolved to reflect the growing sophistication of the
program, but emphasis has remained on different, yet mutually supportive,
responsibilities.

Passage of NHPA in 1966 was a watershed event. It marked a fundamental
shift in how Americansand the Federal Governmentregarded the
role of historic preservation in modern life. Before 1966, historic preservation
was mainly understood in one-dimensional terms: the proverbial historic
shrine or Indian burial mound secured by lock and keyusually in
a national parkset aside from modern life as an icon for study and
appreciation. NHPA largely changed that approach, signaling a much broader
sweep that has led to the breadth and scope of the vastly more complex
historic preservation mosaic we know today. Like the American culture
it mirrors, historic preservation today is perhaps best defined in terms
of its diversity.

As diverse as American culture is, so too is the diversity of historic
properties that express this rich cultural legacy. Consider the intricacy
and the complexity of the modern mosaic. Our definition of historic properties
has evolved to encompass a much broader interpretation of American history,
one that acknowledges significance at the local level. Further, historic
properties are now understood and appreciated as part ofnot isolated
fromthe landscape to which they belong. It is only logical that
this more complex view of what historic properties are, and how Americans
relate to them has engendered equally complex challenges concerning their
preservation and treatment.

Passage of NHPA found most Federal Government agencies at a loss to
respond to the challenges of historic preservation, much less prepared
to cope with the growing public interest it generated. Clearly Federal
institutions needed help in meeting the broad historic preservation goals
set for the Federal Government by Congress in the NHPA.

Over the past 30 years, a number of additional executive and legislative
actions have been directed toward improving the ways in which all Federal
agencies manage historic properties and consider historic and cultural
values in their planning and assistance. Executive Order 11593 (1971)
and, later, Section 110 of NHPA (1980, amended
1992), provided the broadest of these mandates, giving Federal agencies
clear direction to identify and consider historic properties in Federal
and federally assisted actions. The National Historic Preservation Amendments
of 1992 further clarified Section 110 and directed Federal agencies to
establish preservation programs commensurate with their missions and the
effects of their authorized programs on historic properties.

Thus today, agencies other than NPS that have major
stewardship responsibilities for public lands and resources, or have the
most frequent, significant effects on historic properties through Federal
assistance and regulatory programs, have substantial historic preservation
responsibilities. These agencies attempt to deal with these mandates in
an era of diminishing financial resources and with highly variable internal
policies, staffing, funding, and program focus.

Historic preservation is both a public activity and a private passion
and is supported through the country by individual citizens, organizations,
businesses, communities, elected officials, and public institutions in
various and varied ways. The National Trust
for Historic Preservation, a private organization chartered by Congress
in 1949, supports and nurtures historic preservation at the grassroots
level. For more than three decades, however, the National Historic Preservation
Program has continued to rely upon the partnership between ACHP, NPS,
and the SHPOs, and has expanded to embrace Certified
Local Governments and Indian tribes. The underlying
premises and principles of the National Historic Preservation Act, and
the partnership it engendered, remain sound.